Here's another from the recital I did last year for Liszt's birthday. It's one of the more rarely played "transcriptions" (actually more of a paraphrase than a transcription--it doesn't follow the original closely at all). I don't know why, because I think it's one of the more interesting, and it's also tremendous fun to play.

I really enjoyed this! I don't know this paraphrase especially well and have never looked at it properly, but my initial impressions are that this is a very good performance. The piano sound is also excellent.

Here's another from the recital I did last year for Liszt's birthday. It's one of the more rarely played "transcriptions" (actually more of a paraphrase than a transcription--it doesn't follow the original closely at all). I don't know why, because I think it's one of the more interesting, and it's also tremendous fun to play.

Outstanding pianist, beautiful piano ! As for the music, I cannot say that I find it unforgetable, but I imagine the pleasure you got playing it... Anyway, thank you for sharing a rarely played piece. Maybe I will listen it another time, and I will discover its merits ! Regards,

I enjoyed this much too. Can't help marveling at Wagners sumptuous melodies, and the sure-footed way Liszt set them for piano. I only regret that he could not resist adding his pyrotechnical bits as usual. But I guess that's part and parcel of the romantic transcription. It is wonderfully played.

This one is on the site, and that typo fixed. I took the liberty to rename it liszt-wagner because that's how it was done with the previous transcription by Andrew.

I took the liberty to rename it liszt-wagner because that's how it was done with the previous transcription by Andrew.

You're not going to like me for this, but if I had a previous transcription up as liszt-wagner (which one? I assume Abendstern - I don't see any liszt-wagner on my artist page), then I'm in error, and really should know better! The convention is composer-transcriber, and Alexander's original naming was correct. (On a side note, it's the convention, but I think it should be composer/transcriber, to avoid confusion with composers with hypenated names like Villa-Lobos). Anyway, I'm glad this is up; it's a very fine performance.

Yes, I'd be a lot happier to see the original composer's name going first.

Some style guides recommend using an en dash to distinguish collaborations from hyphenated names, so you'd have "Wagner–Liszt" rather than "Wagner-Liszt". But for filenames, the hyphen is the most practical way. (Slashes in filenames will mess up some systems.)

For better or worse, we do file these transcriptions under Liszt, not under Bach, Beethoven, Wagner etc. So in that sense it makes sense to name them accordingly. I wonder, if anybody would be brave enough to record it, we would name and file Hamelin's transcription of Liszt's transcription of La Campanella. Under Paganini maybe ?

Let's not even think of using slashes in UNIX filenames, or trying to distinguish between a dash and a hyphen in a shell script.

This will forever remain inconsistent and controversial. It peeves me but I decided long ago to leave it and not spend time trying to rectify it.

This will forever remain inconsistent and controversial. It peeves me but I decided long ago to leave it and not spend time trying to rectify it.

Leaving it is exactly what you didn't do today. Do you mind putting it back the way it was? I won't ask you to change other things on the site, but at least we can start being consistent with newly uploaded files.

Bit of a mess, but I decided I don't actually give a toss about which composer comes first, as long as the name conforms to the overall naming scheme,and as long as my scripts handle it correctly and produce sensible output (we'll have to see about that, there are more glitches with double names etc and I don't feel up to fixing them).

Once again, all these are filed under Liszt. You would not suggest to move them to the Wagner page I hope ?

Maybe not, but the nice people donating recordings to your site sometimes give a toss. I try not to create extra work for you without a good reason, but I do happen to care about this particular issue.

techneut wrote:

Once again, all these are filed under Liszt. You would not suggest to move them to the Wagner page I hope ?

In an ideal world, transcriptions would be listed twice, once for each composer. (And paganini-liszt-hamelin would get three entries.) But I don't expect it to actually happen. If you put the filename back to the name I chose when I uploaded it, I'll be satisfied.

In an ideal world, transcriptions would be listed twice, once for each composer. (And paganini-liszt-hamelin would get three entries.) But I don't expect it to actually happen.

Not unless you volunteer.

hanysz wrote:

If you put the filename back to the name I chose when I uploaded it, I'll be satisfied.

I most certainly hope so It's not worth arguing about and I'm getting so fed up with these endless discussions that I'll name each file just as the uploader wishes. After all the name of a file is totally irrelevant to a listener. I've renamed Andrew's file as well.

Yes, I'd be a lot happier to see the original composer's name going first.

Some style guides recommend using an en dash to distinguish collaborations from hyphenated names, so you'd have "Wagner–Liszt" rather than "Wagner-Liszt". But for filenames, the hyphen is the most practical way. (Slashes in filenames will mess up some systems.)

Anyway, I'm glad people enjoyed the music!

Now, how does the story go? After the concert when the Russian Easter Overture was played, they asked a prominent member of the local Café Society if she knew who wrote the music. She was most happy to show the world that she was there for more than social convention and replied, "Why, yes! The work was written by Rimsky and was transcribed by Korsakov!"

_________________Richard Willmer"Please do not shoot the pianistHe is doing his best."Oscar Wilde: Impressions of America: Leadville

Yes, I'd be a lot happier to see the original composer's name going first.

Some style guides recommend using an en dash to distinguish collaborations from hyphenated names, so you'd have "Wagner–Liszt" rather than "Wagner-Liszt". But for filenames, the hyphen is the most practical way. (Slashes in filenames will mess up some systems.)

Anyway, I'm glad people enjoyed the music!

Now, how does the story go? After the concert when the Russian Easter Overture was played, they asked a prominent member of the local Café Society if she knew who wrote the music. She was most happy to show the world that she was there for more than social convention and replied, "Why, yes! The work was written by Rimsky and was transcribed by Korsakov!"

That's a good one!

_________________Eddy M. del Rio, MD"A smattering will not do. They must know all the keys, major and minor, and they must literally 'know them backwards.'" - Josef Lhevinne

Thanks! The first time I performed this piece was on a Yamaha C5--a beautiful instrument, but it didn't really have the dynamic range to bring out the best of this work. This recording was on a Steinweg-Grotrian concert grand.

Hi Alexander, I really enjoyed this less known piece you introduced and your splendid performance!

_________________Hye-Jin Lee"The love for music. The respect for the composer. The desire to express something that reaches and moves the listener." (Montserrat Caballé about her main motivation for becoming a singer)

Fabulous piece and performance. I didn't know this transcription at all (nor the operatic passage from Meistersinger on which it's based, I'm ashamed to say), but it seems to have an apt mixture of decorous elegance and bravado and your performance convinces me. I was surprised how much the opening bars sounded like a Viennese waltz! (at least to my ears).

What I like most about your performance is that you are able to get these orchestral effects without struggling and your fluid fingers are giving listeners a sense of the whole. There are perhaps a couple of places it could be a mite more rhythmical/clearer, but that's cutting it pretty fine (or it could just be me )

Thanks Joe. I wasn't thinking of a waltz when I played it, but it makes sense now you mentioned it. And no, it's not just you, there are a few things I could improve on. I'm glad you enjoyed it overall.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: TurnitinBot [Bot] and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum